Destruction of phraseologism examples. Destruction of the figurative meaning of phraseological units. Scientific style of language
Phraseological stylistics studies the use in speech of complex language units that have a stable character (puzzle, exaggerate, the cat cried, worth its weight in gold, subsistence level, shock therapy). At the same time, the main attention is paid to the stylistic properties and expressive possibilities of phraseological units, as well as their transformation into artistic and journalistic speech. Various methods of phraseological innovation of writers are considered. The focus of phraseological stylistics is the prevention of speech errors when using phraseological units.
2.1.1. Features of the use of phraseological units in speech
Phraseologisms should be distinguished from free phrases. To understand their fundamental differences, let us dwell on the features of the use of phraseological units in speech.
The most important feature of phraseological units is their reproducibility: they are not created in the process of speech (like phrases), but are used as they are fixed in the language.
Phraseologisms always complex in composition, they are formed by combining several components (get into a mess, upside down, blood with milk). It is important to emphasize that the components of phraseological units are stressed. Therefore, in the strict sense of the term, it is impossible to call phraseologisms used together, but written separately, official and significant words such as under the arm, to death, with a cap, which have only one stress. The complexity of the composition of phraseological units suggests their similarity with free phrases (cf .: get into a mess - fall into a trap). However, the components of a phraseological unit are either not used independently (“prosak”, “upside down”), or change their usual meaning in a phraseological unit (for example, blood with milk means “healthy, with a good complexion, with a blush”).
Many phraseological units are equivalent to one word (cf: to spread the mind - to think, the cat cried - not enough, the fifth wheel in the cart is superfluous). These phraseological units have an undivided meaning. However, there are those that can be equated to a whole descriptive expression (cf .: run aground - get into an extremely difficult situation, press all the pedals - make every effort to achieve a goal or accomplish something). For such phraseological units, as noted by B.A. Larin, “the initial turns out to be free turns of speech, (...) direct in meaning. Semantic renewal usually occurs due to more and more free, figurative use: from a concrete meaning to an abstract one.
Phraseological units characterize constancy of composition. In free phrases, one word can be replaced by another if it fits the meaning (cf .: I read a book, I look through a book, I study a book, I read a novel, I read a story, I read scripts). Phraseological units do not allow such a substitution. It would not occur to anyone to say “the cat cried” instead of a cat crying, instead of spreading it with the mind - “scatter it with the mind” or “scatter with the head”. True, there are phraseological units that have variants, for example, along with the phraseological unit spread out with the mind, its variant is used to spread out (spread out) with the brains; in parallel, phraseological units are used from the bottom of the heart and from the bottom of the heart. However, the existence of variants of some phraseological units does not mean that words can be arbitrarily replaced in them. Variants of phraseological units that are fixed in the language are also characterized by a constant lexical composition and require accurate reproduction in speech.
The constancy of the composition of phraseological units allows us to speak about the "predictability" of their components. So, knowing that the phraseological unit uses the word bosom, you can predict another component - a friend; the word cursed suggests the word enemy used with it, and so on. Phraseologisms that do not allow any variation are absolutely stable combinations.
Most phraseological units are characterized by impenetrability structures: it is not allowed to include new words in them. So, knowing the phraseological units to lower your head, lower your gaze, you cannot say: lower your head low, lower your sad gaze even lower. However, there are also such phraseological units that allow the insertion of separate clarifying words (cf .: kindle passions - kindle fatal passions, lather your head - lather your head well). In some phraseological units, it is possible to skip one or more components. For example, they say to go through fire and water, cutting off the end of a phraseological unit and copper pipes, or to drink a cup to the bottom instead of drinking a bitter cup to the bottom. The reduction of phraseological units in such cases is explained by the desire to save speech means and has no special stylistic meaning.
Phraseological units are inherent grammatical stability, they usually do not change the grammatical forms of words. So, it is impossible to say beat a buck, grind a lyas, replacing the plural forms of a buck, lyas with singular forms, or use a full adjective instead of a short one in phraseology on a bare foot. However, in special cases, variations of grammatical forms in phraseological units are possible (cf .: warm your hand - warm your hands, is it a heard thing - is it a thing heard).
Most phraseological units have fixed word order. For example, it is impossible to swap words in expressions neither light nor dawn; beaten unbeaten lucky; everything flows, everything changes; although the meaning would not seem to be affected if we said: "Everything changes, everything flows." At the same time, in some phraseological units, a change in word order is possible (cf .: take water in your mouth - take water in your mouth, do not leave a stone on a stone - do not leave a stone on a stone). The rearrangement of components is usually allowed in phraseological units consisting of a verb and nominal forms that depend on it.
2.1.8.1. The destruction of the figurative meaning of phraseological units
Writers and publicists, updating the semantics of phraseological units, often restore the original meaning of the words included in them. around Tomilin (Gal.). The author, as it were, returns to the free use of words to the nines, forming a stable combination, and beats their usual lexical meaning. As a result, there is a two-dimensional comprehension of phraseologism. Another example: Not in the eyebrow, but in the eye the chemistry teacher got a fifth grader Senya Orlikov with a pea from a special tube. Moved to tears The teacher will soon be discharged from the hospital. ("LG"). The so-called external homonymy of a phraseological unit and a free phrase that arises in this case gives rise to a pun. Many jokes are based on a two-dimensional understanding of phraseological units: made a lot of noise... in all her actions ... shot. Wise men and dentists look at the root; firefighter always works with fire; The radio awakens the thought. Even at those hours when you really want to sleep (E. Kr.).
The second plan of the meaning of the phraseological unit can be revealed when reading the following text: Got in a bind, but was consoled by reading his name on the cover ("LG"); Misfortunes never come alone: and his work was published in two volumes ("LG"). Sometimes the two-dimensional meaning of a phraseological unit is clarified only in a broad context. So, when reading the title of the article “Broken Map”, we first perceive it in its usual meaning - a complete failure of someone's plans. However, the article tells about the geographical map of Hitler in the last months of the war (This is a map of the end. It is devoid of threatening offensive arrows and flank attacks. We see a foothold compressed to a patch, and semicircles nervously applied to the road grid - the last pockets of resistance. - A. K .) This makes us perceive the title of the article in a new way, fills it with a different meaning, enriching the figurative meaning of the phraseological unit.
The method of destroying the figurative meaning of a phraseological unit, as we see, does not affect the lexical and grammatical composition - its external form is usually preserved, but the meaning is interpreted in a new way (Who are you? I I can't bite you! - do not bite; Life abounds... and all over the head).
Phraseologisms consciously used by the writer in a sense unusual for them can be called semantic neologisms in phraseology. They are often used by comedians (tear and throw - "go in for sports", be on errands - "participate in running competitions").
2.1.8.2. Changing the number of components of a phraseological unit
In order to update phraseological units, writers give them an unusual form. Modifications of phraseological units can be expressed in the reduction or expansion of their composition.
The reduction, or shortening of the composition, of a phraseological unit is usually associated with its rethinking. For example: “Make the deputy pray to God... (cutting off the second part of the proverb - “so he will break his forehead” - only enhances the irony in assessing the decision of the Duma of the Russian Federation, which aggravated the political situation in Transnistria. Another example: Useful tips: Don’t be born beautiful (“ LG") - cutting off the second part of the proverb Do not be born beautiful, but be born happy led to a change in its meaning, the meaning of the new aphorism is "beauty leads to misfortune."
The opposite of reduction is the expansion of the composition of a phraseological unit. For example: The questions we touched on were not random... These are granite stumbling blocks on the road, knowledge, which at all times was the same, frightened people and beckoned to itself (Hertz.) - the definition of granite, introduced into a stable phrase, gives the image a special clarity. The composition of a phraseological unit is often expanded due to the introduction of clarifying words (Cats not ordinary, but with long yellow claws, scrapers her by the heart. - Ch.; Happiness is not in our money.).
Changing the composition of a phraseological unit can become a means of enhancing the expressive coloring of speech (I will look forward to it with great impatience ... just don’t put it off in too long box. - M. G.). In other cases, the introduction of additional words into phraseological phrases gives them new semantic shades. For example: Bad time for joint performances - you can sit in a mud puddle, but you don’t want to (M. G.) - to sit in a puddle means “to put yourself in an awkward, stupid, ridiculous position”; the definition introduced into this phraseological unit expands the meaning: "to allow oneself to be involved in a dishonest game, to become a victim of the machinations of hostile people."
2.1.8.3. Transformation of the composition of a phraseological unit
In artistic speech, for a specific stylistic purpose, it is possible to change the lexical composition of a phraseological unit by updating one or more of its components: “ Laughter through bullets" - the title of an article about the Fifth International Festival of Humor "Ostap" (its co-founder was killed the day before). The one who shoots first laughs. For the red word the communists did not spare the Russian brothers from Transnistria (Compare: For the sake of a red word, one does not feel sorry for either brother or father).
Feuilletonists often resort to replacing the vocabulary components of phraseological phrases. This stylistic device was masterfully used by Ilf and Petrov: Everyone the fibers of your suitcase he was going abroad. New times suggest other jokes to our satirists: Sausage as a mirror of the Russian revolution; At the end of the tunnel eat hot soup; A Mystery Covered in Collapse; With the world line; Cause time to the viewer - "Vremechko"(newspaper headlines).
Updating the composition of phraseological units enhances their expressive coloring, but may not affect their meaning (She fainted from resentment and chagrin), but more often the meaning of phraseological units changes [I would be glad to serve, serve too ("LG")].
More often, the authors replace the components of phraseological units in order to radically change their meaning and create a sharp satirical effect: A good place will not be called a socialist camp; Critics have honored the novel with silence; He laughs well who laughs without consequences; Came? Saw? Shut up! The method of transforming the composition of a phraseological unit is appreciated by poets, the phraseological innovation of Mayakovsky is known: In cramped conditions, but did not dine ...
Using this technique, the authors strive to preserve the sound organization of the phraseological unit as accurately as possible: What is written by the opera ... (an article about crime in Moscow); At least a goal on Teshi's head (about a football player who skillfully scores goals with his head).
The transformation of phraseological units in artistic speech may consist in changing the grammatical forms of their components. For example, V.V. Mayakovsky replaces black in a phraseological unit as a non-adjective in a positive degree with a form of a comparative degree: Having raised baked potatoes in personalities, blacker than a Negro who has not seen baths, six pious Catholic women climbed on board the steamer Espan.
The transformation of a phraseological unit may consist in changing the order of words in a stable turnover. Inversion in a phraseological unit that has a stable word order often completely renews its meaning (You go further, you will be quieter. - “LG”).
Sometimes the integrity of the phraseological unit is violated, and it is quoted in parts (- By God, I don’t know how and what I am related to him; it seems that the seventh water, maybe not even on jelly, but on something else ... Quite simply, I call him uncle: he responds. - Ven.).
Often writers and publicists resort to the contamination of phraseological units to express thoughts in an unusual, witty formulation [Divide other people's opinions and rule ("LG"); Is silence golden because it is a sign of consent? ("LG"); He lived his life at the expense of others ("LG"); He turned the rivers back so as not to swim against the current ("LG")]. Contamination of phraseological units is often accompanied by their rethinking. For example: Thoughts are so spacious that there are no words; Humor can not be taken away from him: what is not, that is not! - the comic effect of these jokes is based on the collision of incompatible statements: the second phraseological unit denies the idea contained in the first one.
Based on the transformation of phraseological units, writers create artistic images that are perceived as a development of the theme given by the phraseological unit. So, the saying Soul knows when to stop gives grounds for the poet to say: Report everything in the form, hand over the trophies, slowly, and then they will feed you, will be the measure of the soul(Tward.). The poet only hinted at a well-known phraseological unit, but it is already present in the mind of the reader, creating a kind of subtext. The destruction of the old meaning of a phraseological unit, the “liberation” of the image inherent in it creates sometimes an unexpected artistic effect. For example: To the world by a thread - you will become naked, you will droop with a willow, you will melt like a hill (Ascension). Having based these lines on the proverb With the world on a thread - a naked shirt, the poet gives it the opposite meaning.
Phraseological innovation of writers can also be manifested in their creation of figurative expressions reminiscent of well-known phraseological units. For example, V.V. Mayakovsky in his poem "To Sergei Yesenin" surprisingly strongly and capaciously transformed Yesenin's aphorism. In this life, it is not new to die, but, of course, it is not newer to live either: It is not difficult to die in this life. Make life much more difficult. Developing the theme of life and death in the poem, the poet creates a new aphorism: We must first redo life, redo it - you can sing. In terms of philosophical depth and expressiveness, Mayakovsky's phraseological units are not inferior to Yesenin's phraseological unit, which served as the basis for them. Phraseological innovation of writers is not limited to the stylistic devices considered here, the possibilities of creative renewal of phraseological units are inexhaustible.
2.1.9. Speech errors associated with the use of phraseological units
Ignorance of the exact meaning of a phraseological unit, its lexical and grammatical composition, expressive and stylistic features, scope of use, compatibility, and finally, an inattentive attitude to the figurative nature of phraseological units lead to speech errors. When using phraseological units, errors may not be related to the specifics of phraseological units as reproducible stable turns. An unsuccessful choice of a phraseological synonym, the use of a phraseological unit without taking into account its semantics, a violation of the compatibility of a phraseological phrase with the words of the surrounding context, etc. - all these errors, in essence, do not differ from similar speech errors when using individual words.
The use of a phraseological unit without taking into account its semantics distorts the meaning of the statement. So, A.S. Pushkin, after reading "Answer to Gnedich" by K.N. Batyushkov, against the lines Your friend forever from now on gives his heart with a hand, remarked: “Batyushkov is marrying Gnedich!”. The use of a phraseological unit with a certain stylistic coloring may conflict with the content and style of the work. For example: He rushed about, looking for salvation. I came up with a touching story in my defense, but it sounded like the swan song of this hardened scoundrel. Phraseologism swan song, which contains a positive assessment, a sympathetic attitude towards the person being spoken about, is stylistically inappropriate in this context. It is impossible to combine phraseological units with a contrasting stylistic coloring in one sentence, for example, lowered, colloquial, and bookish, solemn ones: He promised that won't hit the dirt and will work to match the regular drivers steppe ships. It is also unacceptable to combine expressively colored phraseological units with official business vocabulary. The chairman showered me with golden rain to the sum of eighty thousand rubles; emotionally vivid, poetic phraseological units with speech clichés dating back to "clerical eloquence": Happy is the one who and live in a hurry and feel in a hurry by and large. The mixture of styles that occurs when they are combined gives the speech a parodic sound.
Let us analyze the errors that occur with the incorrect use of stable turns of speech and are associated with an unjustified change in the composition of a phraseological unit or with a distortion of its figurative meaning.
2.1.10. Stylistically unjustified change in the composition of a phraseological unit
The composition of a phraseological unit in specific speech situations can change in different ways.
1. There is an unmotivated expansion of the phraseological unit as a result of the use of clarifying words: For livestock breeders, the main highlight of the program is the breeding of valuable breeds of livestock. There is a phraseological unit that is the highlight of the program, but the definition of the main one is inappropriate here. The authors, not taking into account the impenetrability of phraseological units, try to “supplement” them, color them with epithets, which gives rise to verbosity. More examples: Let's hope that Volkov will say his big word in coaching; With all her long legs she rushed to run.
In irregular speech, combinations of a pleonastic nature are quite often found, formed from phraseological units and redundant definitions for their components: to suffer a complete fiasco, an accidental stray bullet, hard Sisyphean labor, cheerful Homeric laughter. In other cases, the expansion of the phraseological unit is not associated with pleonasm. For example: Unenviable palm tree according to the growth of crime belongs to the Southern Administrative District; Commercial organizations were at the height of the new challenges they face. Phraseologisms palm, to be on top do not allow distribution.
2. There is an unjustified reduction in the composition of the phraseological unit as a result of the omission of its components. So, they write: this is an aggravating circumstance (instead of an aggravating circumstance). Erroneously truncated phraseological units lose their meaning, their use in speech can lead to the absurdity of the statement [The success of this student wish you much better(instead of: leave much to be desired); Coach Williamson made a "good face"(omitted: bad play)].
3. Often there is a distortion of the lexical composition of phraseological units [Master more than once heart to heart with his wards (it is necessary: he spoke)]. The erroneous substitution of one of the components of the phraseological unit can be explained by the synonymous similarity of the words [The path led from the gate to the outbuilding from which Antoshin had just barely removed his feet (it should have taken him away)] and even more often by the confusion of paronyms [He entered himself (should: left); escaped from his tongue (necessary: broke); draw around the finger (necessary: circle); ... did not lose heart (it is necessary: did not fall)]. In other cases, instead of one of the components of a phraseological unit, a word is used that only remotely resembles the repressed one [Well, they, as they say, have books in their hands (instead of: cards in their hands); The organizers of this trip ruined it themselves by flopping into a bucket of honey a drop of tar(instead of: add a fly in the ointment to a barrel of honey)]. False associations sometimes give rise to very funny and ridiculous mistakes [Here, figure out which of them hides an ax in his bosom(phraseologism: keep a stone in your bosom); Half an hour later he looked scalded chicken in front of the administration (phraseologism is distorted: wet chicken)].
4. A change in the composition of a phraseological unit can be caused by the renewal of grammatical forms, the use of which in set phrases is fixed by tradition. For example: Children killed the worms and had fun - you can not use the plural instead of the singular. An unjustified replacement of the grammatical form of one of the components of a phraseological unit is often the cause of inappropriate comicality: the unusual, strange form of familiar stable turns is surprising (It remains a mystery how four people could erect such a colossus, even seven spans in the foreheads and oblique fathoms in the shoulders). In other cases, a new grammatical form of a word as part of a phraseological combination affects the semantic aspect of speech. Thus, the use of an imperfect present tense verb instead of a perfect past tense verb makes the statement illogical: A veteran has been crossing the threshold of the 100th police department for more than twenty years. Phraseologism to cross the threshold is used only in the meaning of “perform some important act” and excludes repeated repetition of the action, therefore it is possible to use the verb only in the form of the perfect form; replacement of the specific form leads to absurdity.
As part of phraseological units, it is also impossible to allow distortion of prepositions [He never thought that these words would come true in his fate to the full extent (instead of: to the full extent)]. Such careless handling of prepositions and case forms makes speech illiterate. However, some phraseological units are truly “unlucky” - they are constantly replaced by prepositions: put dots on and; seven spans on his forehead; Mikhail quickly dressed and hurried to the call. The inability to choose the right case forms and prepositions as part of phraseological units gives rise to such “strange” mistakes: creaking their hearts, those holding power, this is a fraught business with consequences, the tablecloth for him on the road, his head is spinning.
2.1.11. Distortion of the figurative meaning of a phraseological unit
The greatest damage to style is caused by the unjustified destruction of the figurativeness of phraseological expression. For example: phonograph record hasn't said her last word yet. The context showed the direct meaning of the words that formed the phraseological unit, and as a result, a pun arose. The perception of phraseologism in its unusual, unimaginative meaning gives the speech an inappropriate comedy: This year Aeroflot managed to keep the flow of passengers at a high level; Getting to work at the drifting station, our team at first I didn't feel the ground under my feet. To avoid such errors, it is necessary to take into account the peculiarities of the context.
The context can not only show the ugly meaning of phraseological units, but also reveal the inconsistency of their metaphorical structure, if the author imprudently “pushes” stable combinations that are incompatible in meaning. For example: These people stand firmly on their feet so you won't be able to clip their wings. The first phraseological unit, as it were, “attaches” the image to the ground, and this makes it impossible to use the second phraseological unit, which is based on the idea of flight: clipping wings means “making it impossible to fly”. One phraseological unit excludes another.
The contradictory images underlying phraseological units and tropes also do not coexist in such a sentence: Aviators on their wings are always on time come to the rescue(they do not come on wings, but fly in). No matter how we get used to the figurative meaning of phraseological units, their metaphorical nature immediately makes itself felt if their figurativeness comes into conflict with the content. Therefore, sentences are unsuccessful, for example, in which the owner says about a hunting dog: This one will not come with empty hands, - and the science fiction writer, drawing Martians with tentacles instead of hands, notices that the alien "pulled himself together."
Violation of the unity of the figurative system of phraseology and context gives the speech comedy. For example: The speaker spoke in a loud and shrill voice, like a Jericho trumpet. It turns out that the Jericho trumpet speaks and even has a shrill voice. Words surrounding a phraseological unit are usually involved in a figurative context. Therefore, it is unacceptable to use them in a figurative sense, which does not take into account the figurative nature of phraseological units associated with them. For example: The decision of the meeting reads in black and white ... Or: Vasily Timofeevich has had a difficult life path. You can write in black and white, the path - pass, elect. The choice of verbs in such cases "undermines" the figurativeness of phraseological combinations.
A prerequisite for the correct use of phraseological units is strict adherence to the features of their compatibility with the words of the context. So, the phraseological unit to publish can be used only in combination with the names of printed publications. Therefore, the proposal is stylistically incorrect. The Musical Theater released the ballet “The Lonely Sail Turns White”; in this case, it was necessary to write staged a ballet ... or prepared a premiere ... Such a phrase is stylistically incorrect: Life, as in the palm of your hand, passed in public (phraseologism at a glance requires the word is visible).
When using phraseological units, various errors are often combined. Thus, a change in the lexical composition of a phraseological unit is accompanied by a distortion of figurative meaning. For example, in the sentence Oblomov was the banner of the times the phraseological unit “sign of the times” is distorted - “a social phenomenon typical of this era”. The substitution of the image underlying the phraseological unit radically transforms its meaning. Some errors associated with the distortion of the composition (phraseologism and its figurative meaning, are widely used in speech [Although the stake on the head is scratched (it is necessary: teshi - from the verb to hew); Bring to a white knee (it is necessary: to a white heat)].
2.1.12. Contamination of various phraseological units
The reason for the incorrect use of phraseological units in speech may be the contamination of elements of various set expressions. For example: The tongue does not rise talk about it... Phraseologisms are known, the tongue does not turn and the hand does not rise; the author used a noun from the first phraseological unit, and a verb from the second. Some stable combinations are constantly “unlucky”: [they say: take action (of take action and take steps), give importance (of pay attention and give importance), make a difference (of influence and give importance)]. Such stylistic errors are explained by false associations. Some errors caused by the contamination of elements of various phraseological units are repeated so often that we perceive them as expressions that have become entrenched in vernacular (play the main violin).
The contamination of elements of various phraseological units can make speech illogical: Many, knowing about these outrages, look at the tricks of enterprising businessmen through their sleeves (they work through their sleeves, but look through their fingers); This business not worth a penny(a mixture of phraseological units - not worth a penny and not worth a damn egg). In other cases, the semantic side of speech does not suffer, but the sentence still needs stylistic editing (We could ring all the bells, but at first they decided to think it over calmly - it is necessary to eliminate the contamination of phraseological units to sound the alarm and ring all the bells).
Contamination of elements of various phraseological units can cause a comic sound of speech (a grated sparrow, a shot kalach, not everything is a hangover for a cat, it’s Shrovetide in someone else’s feast). Examples of contamination of elements of various phraseological units can be found in the magazine "Crocodile" in the section "You can't think of it on purpose" (Thus, I remained overboard broken trough).
Considering stylistic errors associated with the incorrect use of phraseological units, one should also touch on those cases when involuntary puns appear in speech, due to the fact that the speaker uses words in their direct meaning, but listeners perceive their combination as a figurative expression of a phraseological nature, so that the statement is given a completely unexpected meaning. The so-called external homonymy of phraseological units and free combinations, which has become the cause of the error, can lead to the most unexpected puns, giving speech an inappropriate comic. For example, an agitated speaker speaks of unrest at a construction site: Three times they wrote down in the minutes the decision to reserve slate for the landfill, but the time has come - there is nothing to cover. Against the background of an emotionally charged statement, the last two words are perceived not in the literal sense, but as a phraseological unit meaning "nothing to say in response, nothing to object to." Thus, phraseology, being a source of imagery and expressiveness of speech, can also create significant difficulties with an inattentive attitude to the word.
In stable combinations, in advance, that is, before the act of speech, not only the general grammatical model is given, but also the specific lexical composition of the entire combination. It is not created anew at the moment of speech, in relation to a given thought, but already exists and is retrieved from memory when a need arises for it. Stable combinations are sometimes called "linguistic clichés" (or "stamps"), they are inserted into our speech as a whole.
There are words that have a very narrow, selective compatibility with other words - up to a single compatibility. In these cases, the stability of the combination is created by the very fact of the single compatibility of one of the components. More often. however, the reason for stability lies elsewhere - in a more or less distinct semantic isolation of the phrase, in that or another shift
values. Stable combinations with a similar shift (it is clearly detected when compared with the same words outside the scope of this combination) are called phraseological units, and the science that studies them - phraseology 1 . In some phraseological units - they are sometimes denoted by the term "phraseme" - the semantic transformation is noted in only one component. So, as part of the combinations of a desk, dining table, edged weapons, the noun is used in its usual meaning: after all, the writing and dining tables are varieties of the table, and edged weapons are a kind of weapon. Similarly, in set the table, the word table retains its usual meaning, but set means something different than in set the table with a tablecloth. In other phraseological units, the so-called idioms, there is a general shift
values affecting all components. Examples are the expressions to sit down at the same table "start negotiations", Cards on the table! The integral meaning of an idiom (as well as a phraseme, by the way) is irreducible to the sum of the meanings of its components. It is this irreducibility of the integral meaning to the sum of the meanings of the parts that is called idiomatic.
Sources of phraseological units Russian language are diverse. The main part of phraseological units of the Russian language is of primordially Russian origin, their source is, for example, professional speech, jargon (rub glasses, a bit card, go for broke - among gamblers) and colloquial speech. Some phraseological units came from dialects and are associated with the labor of the peasantry (to turn the shafts, from a bag into a matting, it is written on the water with a pitchfork). Many phraseological units have liturgical books as their source (the holy of holies, the fiend of hell, in the image and likeness, the voice of one crying in the wilderness, the promised land). A lot of phraseological units came from ancient mythological literature (Augean stables, Achilles' heel, Prometheus fire). Sometimes borrowed phraseological units are used without translation: alma mater (lat. mother-nurse); tabula rasa (lat. clean board; something untouched, absolutely clean). The source of the original phraseology is turns from the works of writers: happy hours are not observed (A. Griboyedov); affairs of bygone days (A. Pushkin). Such set expressions from fiction and journalism are usually called popular expressions
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/
Abstract on the topic:
"Phraseological system of the Russian language"
Introduction
2. Chapter II
2.1 Colloquial style of language
2.2 Bookish style of the language
2.3 Scientific style of language
2.4 Formal business language
2.5 Journalistic style of language
Conclusion
Bibliography
Introduction
A lot of articles, books, dissertations have been written about phraseology, and interest in this area of the language does not dry out either among researchers or those who are simply not indifferent to the word. The accuracy of the formula expressed at the dawn of the century by the famous Danish linguist Otto Jespersen, who called phraseology “despotically capricious and elusive thing”, is confirmed. The very fact of the presence in the language, in addition to words, of entire verbal complexes, which are sometimes identical to the word, and more often are a unique linguistic phenomenon, characterized by vivid expressiveness, imagery and emotionality, serves as a reason for us to explore this particular section of stylistics. However, phraseology as a set of all set expressions in a particular language is too wide a field of activity for such a small work as this one.
The Russian language is the national language of the Russian people, which has the richest democratic and revolutionary traditions and the highest culture. This is the language of the builders of a new society, which the best minds of mankind have dreamed of for centuries. It is the language of modern science, technology and culture. The Russian language in our time is the connecting link of the great multinational Russian state with the people of the whole planet. The Russian word is the voice of the world, a passionate call for equality, brotherhood and friendship of all peoples, in the name of peace and social progress. The scientific study of the Russian language begins where an element of awareness of the laws inherent in the language is added to the objectively flowing process of mastering the native speech. This essay considers only one of the many independent sections that study individual aspects (levels) of the language. Brief information is given from the history of the study of Russian phraseology in Russian linguistics, some general concepts of phraseology, the object of phraseology, its scope and boundaries are determined. The division of phraseological units into types according to the degree of semantic unity of their components. The problem of differentiation of variants and synonyms of phraseological units. Question about the original form of phraseological units. In this work, the object of description is a phraseological unit, as synonyms for this term, the names of the idiom, figurative expression are also used here.
Chapter I
Phraseology as an independent linguistic discipline arose in the 40s. 20th century in Soviet linguistics. The prerequisites for the theory of phraseology were laid in the works of A.A. Potebnya, I.I. Sreznevsky, A.A. Shakhmatov and F.F. Fortunatov. The development of phraseology was also influenced by the ideas of the French linguist Sh.Bali (1865-1947). In Western European and American linguistics, phraseology does not stand out as a separate section of linguistics. The question of studying stable combinations of words in a special section of linguistics - phraseology was raised in the educational and methodological literature as early as 20-40. in the works of E.D. Polivanov, S.I. Abakumov, L.A. Bulakhovsky. The study of phraseology was stimulated by lexicographic practice, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, by the works of Vinogradov, in which questions were raised about the basic concepts of phraseology, its scope and tasks. In the 1950s, the main attention was paid to the similarities and differences between phraseological units with a word and a combination of words; the problems of phraseology were mainly limited to clarifying the criteria for phraseology and clarifying the foundations for the classification of phraseological units. Since the end of the 50s, there has been a tendency for a systematic approach to the problems of phraseology, issues related to the description of phraseological units as structural units of the language are being developed (A.I. Smirnitsky, O.S. Akhmanova). The 60-70s in the development of phraseology are characterized by the intensive development of the actual phraseological methods for studying the objects of phraseology, based on the ideas of a system-level analysis of the facts of the language (V.L. Arkhangelsky, N.N. Amosova, V.P. Zhukov, A.V. .Kunin, M.T. Tagiev), the study of the systemic organization of the phraseological composition (I.I. Chernysheva, N.M. Shansky) and its development (V.N. Mokienko, F.N. Popov, A.I. Fedorov) , special attention is paid to the semantics of phraseological units, and its nominative aspect (V.N. Telia), phrase formation in its dynamics (S.G. Gavrin, Yu.A. Gvozdarev), signs of compatibility of word components (M.M. Kopylenko, Z .D.Popova), comparative-typological study of phraseological composition (Yu.Yu.Avaliani, L.I.Rozeyzon), as well as the development of descriptions of phraseological units in dictionaries (A.M.Babkin, A.I.Molotkov).
The subject of phraseology as a section of linguistics is the study of the categorical features of phraseological units, on the basis of which the main features of phraseology are distinguished and the question of the essence of phraseological units as special units of the language is resolved, as well as the identification of patterns of functioning of phraseological units in speech and the processes of their formation. However, in the presence of a single subject of research and despite the numerous detailed developments of many issues of phraseology, there are still different points of view on what phraseology is, what is the scope of the phraseology of the Russian language. The lists of phraseological units of the Russian language offered by different scientists are so different from each other that with good reason one can talk about different, often directly opposite, even mutually exclusive views on the subject of research and about inconsistency and confusion in the scientific terminology used to refer to the relevant concepts. . This explains the fuzzy understanding of the tasks, goals and the very essence of the term “phraseology”, and the fact that there is no sufficiently specific unified classification of phraseological units of the Russian language in terms of their semantic unity. Although the most common (with clarifications and additions) is the classification of VV Vinogradov. That is why, finally, much in the Russian phraseological system is just beginning to be studied.
Summarizing a wide range of views on phraseology, the following can be noted. In modern linguistics, two directions of research have been clearly outlined. The first direction has as its starting point the recognition that a phraseological unit is such a unit of language that consists of words, that is, by its nature, a phrase. At the same time, some scientists express the idea that the object of phraseology is all concrete phrases that are actually possible in a given language, regardless of the qualitative differences between them. So, for example, Kopylenko says the following: “Phraseology covers all ... combinations of lexemes that exist in a given language, including the so-called “free” phrases.
On the other hand, only certain categories and groups of phrases are recognized as the object of phraseology within the boundaries of this direction, which stand out from all those possible in speech with a special originality. Depending on what signs are taken into account when highlighting such phrases, the composition of such units in the language is determined. Only these “special” phrases can be called phraseological units. Despite the conventions of concepts and the associated distinction, it is usually said that phraseology can be represented:
a) as a phraseology of the language in the “broad” sense of the word, including in its composition both phrases that are completely rethought, and phrases that have non-rethought word components. An example of such a “broad” understanding of the volume and composition of phraseology is the point of view of V.L. Arkhangelsky, O.S. Akhmanova, N.M. Shansky.
b) as the phraseology of the Russian language in the “narrow” sense of the word, which includes only word combinations that have been completely rethought. Among the works reflecting such an understanding of the volume and composition of the phraseology of the Russian language are, for example, articles by V.P. Zhukov.
In both cases, the verbal nature of the phraseological unit, as well as the lexeme nature of its components, is not questioned by these scientists. Phraseologism is recommended to be considered as a contamination of the features of a word and a phrase, the homonymy of the phraseological unit and the structure of the phrase correlated with it is emphasized.
The second direction in Russian phraseology proceeds from the fact that a phraseological unit is not a phrase (neither in form nor in content), it is a unit of language that does not consist of words. The object of phraseology are expressions that are only genetically the essence of phrases. “They are decomposable only etymologically, that is, outside the system of modern language, in historical terms.” These expressions are opposed to phrases that are not homonymous, since they are qualitatively different from them. The main thing in the study of a phraseological unit is not the semantic and formal characteristics of the components that form it, and not the connections between the components, but the phraseological unit itself as a whole, as a unit of language that has a certain form, content and features of use in speech. The composition of phraseology is formed from categorically similar units. The history and etymology of each phraseological unit is studied in a non-straight line depending on some “universal” schemes for rethinking phrases, on the degree of semantic fusion of components and on the degree of desemantization of words in phrases. The main provisions of this direction are considered by A.I. Molotkov in the introductory article to the “Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language”, in his book “Fundamentals of Phraseology of the Russian Language” and other works.
We are closer to the position of N.M. Shansky, expressed in a number of his works, for example, in the book “Phraseology of the Modern Russian Language”. This point of view seems to be the most justified, especially since it is shared by many scientists, in particular, the authors of the encyclopedia "Russian language". There, for example, the following definition of phraseologism is given:
Phraseologism, a phraseological unit, is a common name for semantically non-free combinations of words that are not produced in speech (as syntactic structures similar in form to them - phrases or sentences), but are reproduced in it in a socially assigned stable ratio of semantic content and a certain lexicon. - grammatical structure. Semantic shifts in the meanings of lexical components, stability and reproducibility are interconnected universal and distinctive features of a phraseological unit.
Phraseologism has a number of essential features: stability, reproducibility, integrity of meaning, dismemberment of its composition (separate structure). Stability and reproducibility are related, but not identical concepts. All linguistic units with stability are reproducible, but not all reproducible formations are endowed with stability.
Reproducibility is the regular repetition of language units of varying degrees of complexity. Proverbs and sayings are reproduced: The word is not a sparrow, it will fly out - you won’t catch it; Boring day until evening, if there is nothing to do; winged sayings: Happy hours are not observed; composite terms and names: polar bear, sulfuric acid, nuclear reactor; actually phraseological units: brother tugboat, ate the dog, etc.
Stability is a measure, a degree of semantic unity and indecomposability of components. Stability serves as a form of manifestation of idiomaticity. So, phraseological units with a holistic unmotivated meaning like hell in the middle of nowhere - `very far away' are characterized by greater stability than phraseological units with a holistic motivated meaning like there is nowhere to spit - `so many people that there is no free space at all.
A holistic meaning is such a general (single) meaning of a phraseological unit that is difficult or impossible to derive from the meaning of the constituent parts. The integrity of the meaning of a phraseological unit is achieved by a complete or partial rethinking of the components, as a result of which, as a rule, they diverge in meaning from the corresponding words of free use.
An important feature of a phraseological unit is its dissected structure, "super-verbalism". So, the phraseological unit to rub glasses and the free phrase to read a newspaper are built according to the same pattern “ch. + noun. in wine etc., are separate units and do not differ in their external features.
Phraseologism with all its composition is combined in speech with a significant word.
Stylistically, phraseological units differ sharply from words. The bulk of words are stylistically neutral, which cannot be said about phraseological units, the main purpose of which is the expression of various kinds of assessments and the attitude of the speaker to what is being expressed, which are an essential element of phraseological meaning. A text consisting of phraseological units alone cannot exist. Phraseological units of the Russian language can be divided into three main stylistic layers. Most of the phraseological units belong to colloquial speech. The scope of such phraseological units is everyday communication, an oral form of dialogic speech: turn up your nose, plug your belt. Colloquial phraseological units are used mainly in everyday speech and have a rudely reduced stylistic connotation: climb into a bottle, do not knit bast, do not slurp cabbage soup. One of the distinguishing features of colloquial idioms is that they are mainly formed as a result of a metaphorical rethinking of free phrases of the same lexical composition: throw a bait, plug (whom) in the belt, etc. Interstyle phraseological units do not have any stylistic coloring (reduced or sublime) and are actively used in different styles of oral and written speech. This is a relatively small category of phraseological units: in any case, from time to time. For the most part, stylistically neutral phraseological units include components that correlate with words of non-specific content. Therefore, the corresponding turns, as a rule, cannot be opposed to free phrases of an equivalent composition and, as a result, are deprived of a generalized metaphorical meaning. Bookish phraseological units are predominantly characteristic of written speech and usually give it a touch of elation and solemnity; they are inherent mainly in public - journalistic, official business and fiction speech. Book phraseological units do not always have an expression of solemnity or elation. They can also be stylistically neutral. Such are the turns of foreign language origin, characteristic of literary and bookish speech, such as probing the soil, the Augean stables. Journalistic phraseological units are used in social and political literature. Their goal is to communicate knowledge and influence readers or listeners. As a result, journalistic phraseological units are close to both scientific and book style. They contain the most diverse vocabulary - from special technical to high, poetic.
Scientific phraseological units are used in scientific works of all fields of knowledge. Their main purpose is to communicate information and results obtained by a particular branch of science. The scientific style of phraseological units is characterized by the use of a large number of terms related to the relevant field of science, and abstract vocabulary. Even specific words are usually used in an abstract sense.
In an official business style, phraseological units are used in clerical, legal and diplomatic documents. In business speech, they have a high degree of standardization. Phraseologisms are used in their direct and exact meaning, which does not allow for double interpretation.
From the point of view of the relevance of the application, phraseological units, like words, can be common, obsolete and obsolete. The degree of usage also depends on the stylistic coloring of the phraseological unit: stylistically neutral and colloquial phraseological units are usually used actively; on the contrary, book turns are not so characteristic of the word usage of our days. Obsolete phrases lose their internal form and often contain archaic elements.
The structural and semantic properties of phraseological units that distinguish their types are formed, as a rule, in the process of rethinking the original combinations of words as a whole or at least one of the lexical components of the combination. In the first case, phraseological units are formed that have a continuous meaning (or the property of idiomaticity). A fused meaning can be figurative or ugly, and the purpose of their lexical components is indecomposable: to look through one's fingers, to see the sights, to laugh at chickens, to feel relieved from the heart. In the second, a phraseologically related meaning is formed in the rethought word, which can be realized only in combination with a certain word or with a number of words, which leads to the formation of stable verbal complexes that have an analytical (dissected) meaning: white meat, golden youth, slave of passions (habits , fashion), to come to a thought (to a conclusion, to a decision).
Among phraseological units of the first kind, phraseological fusions are distinguished (their meanings are absolutely unmotivated in the modern vocabulary of the language): pour bullets, the curve will take out, on all crusts, and phraseological units, in the meaning of which one can single out the meaning motivated by the meanings of the components in their usual use: block the way, at full speed, dark forest. A distinctive feature of unity is figurativeness.
Phraseologisms, characterized by analytical meaning, are a special type of structural and semantic units of phraseological composition - phraseological combinations. These are phraseological turns in which there are words both with free meaning and with phraseologically connected ones. A specific feature of words with a phraseologically related meaning is their lack of an independent sign function: with the semantic separation of such meanings of words, they are able to designate out of linguistic objects only in combination with other words that act as nominatively supporting components of these combinations of words (black bread, black market, black suit, black day). This property of them is manifested in the dependence of the choice of words with phraseologically related meanings on semantically key words in the process of constructing the lexico-grammatical composition of the sentence. Restrictions in choice are fixed by a norm that fixes the compatibility of words in their phraseologically related meanings with certain words: in one word, a row of words or several rows, for example: overspending, the finger of fate, the son of the steppes (mountains), deep old age or deep night (autumn, winter), and combinations as a whole are characterized by limitations in the transformation of their lexical and grammatical structure. Words with phraseologically related meanings act as constant elements of phraseological combinations, they enter into synonymous, antonymic and subject-thematic relationships only together with semantically key words for them. Phraseological combinations have almost no homonymous free combinations of words.
NM Shansky also identifies the fourth type of phraseological units - phraseological expressions. These are phraseological phrases that are stable in their composition and use, which are not only semantically articulated, but also consist entirely of words with a free meaning. Phraseological expressions differ from phraseological combinations in that they do not contain words with a phraseologically related meaning: All ages are submissive to love; To be afraid of wolves - do not go into the forest; Wholesale and Retail; seriously and for a long time; the process has begun; market economy. The words that form them cannot have synonyms.” Their hallmark is reproducibility. Phraseological expressions are divided into nominative and communicative (correlated with a part of a sentence and with a sentence, respectively).
As significant units, phraseological units are used in the language in different ways. Some act in a constant lexical and grammatical composition: weeping willow; The Irony of Fate; The dead have no shame; in the image and likeness; form the basis; others function in the form of several equal variants. And the fact of the presence in the language of a large number of phraseological units similar in semantics, but differing in lexical and grammatical design, causes heated discussions. The main question facing practical phraseology is what is considered options, and what is synonymous with one or another turnover. The concept of a phraseological unit variant is usually given against the background of the identity of its integral meaning or image. Most scholars admit that "variants of a phraseological phrase are its lexical and grammatical varieties, identical to it in meaning and degree of semantic unity." However, disagreements arise when the definition of types of variation begins. The main types of phraseological variation are formal transformations and lexical substitutions of phraseological unit components. This classification of phraseological variants is recognized by most researchers. The formal variation of the components of a phraseological unit is determined by the fact of the genetic commonality of the word and the phraseological component, therefore the types of variation of the component are similar to the types of variation of lexemes. In live speech, you can record all kinds of such options - from accentological and phonetic (cf .: dissolve mushrooms and dissolve mushrooms - “cry, whimper”; it is natural to become an oak, oak, oak, etc., or a distortion of the Bartholomew Night in Psk. Khylamey night) to syntactic (Psk. to work on the state instead of in the state). Morphological variants of phraseological units are usually reduced to two types - paradigmatic and derivational. In the first case, changes in the components are observed within the paradigm of the original words: beat (beat, beat) bucks, keep in mind (dial. in the minds). The second type - options due to modifications of word-building formants: you will lick your fingers / fingers, go / go crazy. Russian phraseology semantic synonym
The lexical variation of the phraseological turnover is stated by many researchers. But even in the latest works, one can find a decisive rejection of the interpretation of lexical substitutions as variance and the desire to consider this phenomenon as a phraseological synonymy. In this regard, the opinion of Babkin, who considers the concept of "phraseological synonym" undeniable, and "phraseological variant" - controversial in relation to cases of lexical replacement of the components of a phraseological unit, is very definite. N.M. Shansky distinguishes three types of phraseological variants:
1) a phraseological unit containing different, but equally semantically empty components (in this case, the phraseological unit can function without these members): it’s not worth a penny (measured) - it’s not worth a penny, that there is (was) strength - that is strength;
2) phraseological units containing words that differ grammatically;
3) phraseological units that differ from one another as a full and abbreviated variety (in this case, their relationship is identical to the relationship that exists between full and abbreviated words): go back down - go back down; to be in an interesting position - to be in a position (cf .: deputy - deputy, radio station - walkie-talkie).
Phraseological phrases that have in their composition common members of the original value, he recommends considering "doublet synonyms". Thus, turnovers of the type set a bath (pepper), from the bottom of my heart - from the bottom of my heart; beat the buckets (shabala); grind nonsense (nonsense); lay down (break) the head; take (imprison) in custody; a stuffed (round) fool, etc., are recognized as synonymous doublets. As Shansky writes, “by their lexico-semantic nature, phraseological units of this kind are similar to single-root lexical synonyms such as toponymy - toponymy, blue - blue, three-ruble note - three-pointer, cunning - cunning.” The point of view according to which lexical substitutions in phraseological phrases lead to the formation of synonyms , and not options, A.I. Fedorov also tries to theoretically substantiate. The replacement of the phraseological unit component, in his opinion, changes the nature of the figurative representation of the latter, its evaluative and stylistic coloring. V.M. Mokienko, on the contrary, believes that such an interpretation significantly impoverishes the concept of a phraseological variant and overly expands the concepts of a phraseological synonym. The main premise that leads researchers to deny the lexical variance of a phraseological unit cannot be recognized as objective. The lexical replacement of components does not always change the image, the nature of the phraseological unit. Not infrequently, words can be replaced - synonyms that ensure the stability of the figurative representation, and the range of these words, especially in live speech, is very wide. Quite often, the replacement of components takes place in the thematic circle of vocabulary, which ensures the relative identity of the figurative representation: lather the neck (head); go crazy (go crazy, go crazy) It is difficult not to recognize the structural-semantic closeness, almost the identity of phrases of this type. Refusal to define them as lexical variants of phraseologism will lead to confusion with phraseological synonyms of various structures and stylistic assessments such as throw back sandals - play in the box - give an oak or count ribs - give a spanking - show Kuz'kin's mother. He also notes that "lexical variation is actually phraseological variation, the transformation of a separately formed, but semantically integral unit." Mokienko considers the unity of internal motivation, the image of phraseological turnover and the relative identity of the syntactic construction, within which lexical substitutions take place, to be the main features of the phraseological unit variant. Due to these conditions, “lexical substitutions in variants of phraseological units are strictly regular, systemic in nature”. In the Encyclopedia "Russian Language" the issue of variants is covered briefly, but quite definitely: “In the structure of most phraseological units-idioms, constant (constant) and variable elements are distinguished. Constant elements form the basis of the identity of the unit, variable elements create the possibility of variation. The variability of phraseological units-idioms is expressed in the modification of elements correlated with units of different levels: lexical-semantic (fall / fall from the moon / from the sky, hang / hold on by a thread / on a thread, we also compare stylistic options: climb / throw on the rampage, turn your head / head), syntactic, morphological, derivational and phonetic, as well as in changing the number of lexical components that do not violate the identity of the unit ". In other words, the authors of the Encyclopedia adhere to approximately the same point of view as V.M. Mokienko. We also consider this view to be the most reasonable. The separate form and integrity of the phraseological unit image ensure the interchangeability of its components and, at the same time, the semantic stability of the phraseological unit with its variability. It is thanks to these properties that it becomes possible to create new phrases, or “quasi-phraseological units”, on the basis of those already existing in the language by varying the components by the author. The issue of variants of phraseological units is especially important, as it is directly related to lexicographic practice. In each dictionary entry of one or another dictionary, one phraseological unit is considered. If we assume that a phraseological unit can have lexical and stylistic variants, then all these variants should be taken into account within one article. If we consider lexical modifications as doublet synonyms, then each synonym should be considered in a separate dictionary entry. At the same time, the task of the lexicographer is partly simplified, because not all synonymous phrases can be mentioned in the dictionary, but, for example, the most common, most frequent ones. The problem of variants and synonyms of phraseological units is also closely related to the question of the original form of phraseological unit. As A.M. Babkin, if the phrases “to catch one’s eye, to throw oneself into one’s eyes, to rush into one’s eyes, to hit one’s eyes and to climb into one’s eyes are variants of one phraseological unit”, then “the question is, which one? Of course, with a purely external lexico-grammatical approach, one can imagine a model: a variable verb + in the eyes. Naturally, lexicographers have difficulties related to the form in which a phraseological phrase should be put in the title of a dictionary entry. The most logical, in our opinion, is the approach used by many lexicographers and considered by V.P. Zhukov in his work “Phraseological variation and synonymy in connection with the problem of phraseography (based on the Dictionary of Phraseological Synonyms of the Russian Language).” The author notes that phraseological units can have variants of one component and can combine several variant forms at the same time (this is especially typical for verbal phraseological units of varying degrees of complexity). The most difficult cases occur when several types of variation take place simultaneously (see above). At the same time, individual variants of a phraseological unit in their specific word usage may outwardly noticeably differ from each other. VP Zhukov gives the following way out of the difficulty. Concerning the options to give the move and set the thrust (“hurriedly run away”), he writes: “the variance here does not go into synonymy, since the original formula of the analyzed turnover looks like this: synonyms". But even under the condition that the lexical modification is perceived by the authors of the dictionary as a synonym, and not a variant of turnover, the problems still remain. They are associated with finding the original form of phraseological units that have grammatical variants. Difficulties of this kind were noticed and characterized by B.T. Khaitov in the article “Phraseologisms in the Dictionary.” The author draws attention to the morphological features of verbal phraseological units of the Russian language and the reflection of these features in the “Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language” edited by A.I. Molotkov (ed. I - 1967, ed. V-1994) In the introductory article “How to Use a Dictionary”, regarding verbal phraseological units that are limited in their word usage, the following instructions are given: “If the verbal component is given not in the infinitive, but in any of the personal forms, then this means that the phraseological unit is used only or predominantly in this form. “Nevertheless, the real embodiment of this provision in some dictionary entries of the Phraseological Dictionary reveals inconsistency. It is this inconsistency that B.T. Khaitov notes. Verbal phraseological units that are used only or predominantly in any of the grammatical forms are placed in the infinitive in some dictionary entries (to chop one’s nose, not to sniff gunpowder, to knock out a wedge with a wedge, give an oak, order to live long, play in a box, look out for everything eyes). It is interesting that illustrative examples often contradict the corresponding heading forms for an obvious reason: due to the limited use of turnover in speech. The opposite picture is also observed: “many phraseological units that have several grammatical forms, the headings of a dictionary entry are placed in any one. Nevertheless, the quotes show several possible forms for a given phraseological unit, and it is not always easy to clearly establish which of them is more common. For example, a phraseological unit sits in the liver, fixed in the 3rd person unit. numbers, in illustrative examples are given in the following forms: “we sit in the liver, sat in the liver; I didn’t blink my eye - I won’t blink my eye, I won’t blink my eye, I won’t blink my eye, I won’t blink my eye.” Fixing verbal phraseological units in the dictionary in one grammatical form or another is important for solving another problem: delimitation of phraseological paronyms. For example: Whose foot has not set foot (non-native view, past time) - where no one has ever been, has not lived. About deaf, wild, uninhabited places. Whose foot will not set foot (past temp., indefinite-personal) - someone will not appear anywhere. Phraseological paronyms can belong both to one and to different lexical and grammatical categories, in which the role of the morphological properties of the main word of a phraseological unit is also important: swallow the tongue - shut up, stop talking, not chat, etc. (verbal phraseological unit); swallow your tongue - very tasty (adverbial idiom) - used only in the form of the 2nd person. General recommendations for fixing verbal phraseological units in the dictionary can be indicated by three points, which was done by B.T. Khaitov:
“1) phraseological units that have all or most grammatical forms in the heading of a dictionary entry should be given in the infinitive, and other forms should be shown with the help of illustrative examples;
2) with phraseological units limited in grammatical forms, it is desirable to place all the used forms, for example: what God sent - what God will send;
3) for phraseological units that have only one grammatical form, it seems more appropriate to fix it with an indication of a restrictive mark, for example: “only in past. vr.”, “only in the 3rd person”, etc. But the main phraseological units are, of course, only a part of the entire phraseological system of the Russian language. And other types of phraseological units also have their own characteristics, and their description in dictionaries is also not ideal. This once again confirms the idea that in the field of phraseology and phraseography Russian scientists open up a wide field for research.
Chapter II
This chapter provides examples of the use of phraseological units in different styles of language.
2.1 Colloquial style of language
Finally, the child woke up and began to yell with a good obscenity, soon another and a third echoed him in unison and pulled him up. M. Gorky. Goremyka Pavel.
I'm putting on a play that I hope will bring me something, and I'm also preparing another from under the floor. Gogol. Letter to M.A. Maksimovich, 14 Aug. 1834.
I, he says, wrote about this to all higher organizations, but believe me, until now I have neither an answer nor a greeting. A. Kolosov. For a samovar.
They muzzle themselves and the troops muzzle. - Bosses are pissed off. -Everyone wants to be older. Sholokhov. Quiet Don.
We were alone in the room. The guys were not shy about anyone and almost walked on their heads. N. Nosov. Christmas tree.
Let different old people there search for versions of long-forgotten legends with fire during the day, and we will record the songs that the people create and sing now. N. Rylenkov. Great Rosstan.
He ate little ... and only occasionally looked up at Kollomeitsev, who ... burst into a nightingale. Turgenev. Nov.
For a month and a half, Pasha Kiselev lived with grief in half, renting a corner from a compassionate old woman for three rubles. A. Saparov. Fake chervonets.
From morning to evening the peasant beats like a fish on ice, but still there is nothing. A. Afanasiev. Woe.
She scolded herself for her lack of restraint and her long tongue. N. Dubov. Orphan.
Yurka loves meat... And Dick loves it. Yes, and the grandmother eats for a sweet soul, even though it's a sin. V. Kozlov. Yurka Goose.
Why do you need a war? You moved your brains: who needs it? I. Kozlov. Life in struggle.
The general is sleeping right and sees how he will force the partisan army to go on the defensive, to business that is not at all familiar to it. S. Zalygin. Salty Pad.
Now there are no such families, but then quite often there were such families - fifteen people each, and in others up to twenty. T. Yakushkin. Apple branch.
Sappers climbed out of the skin to slow down the advance of the enemy. S. Borzenko. El Alamein.
After school I will play football for an hour and a half, and then I will do my homework with a fresh mind. N. Nosov. Vitya Maleev at school and at home.
Ek where tossed! What a mist! Find out who wants! Gogol. Auditor.
Pavlik completely strayed from home after the death of his mother ... He even spends the night no one knows where. Fedin. An extraordinary summer.
As soon as the "Oslyabya" went out of order, the "Wild" went to him at full speed. Novikov - Surf. Tsushima.
Petya has never been to Near Mills. He knew for sure that it was terribly far away, "in the middle of nowhere." V. Kataev. A lone sail turns white.
2.2 Bookish style of the language
This chance happened (did not answer the letter) because our desk represents the Augean stables, and only now I could find a piece of paper. Mussorgsky. Letter to V.V. Stasov, March 31, 1872.
Attitude to work is the alpha and omega, everything comes from here! V. Dmitrevsky and B. Chetverikov. We are peaceful people.
I didn’t think about anything now, and it’s not known how long this Bartholomew night would have lasted, but suddenly my knife broke. V. Soloukhin. Grass.
Whoever understands this will leave military service with the Annibal oath to fight together with the advanced class of the people for the liberation of the people from despotism. Lenin, v.4, p.391.
He grabbed his head: what if it seeps into the coveted cache with the library and wets precious books? "Sword of Damocles over the cache!" he wrote that day in his diary. R. Peresvetov. Secrets of faded lines.
Children, perhaps no less than us adults, are looking for one guiding principle and Ariadne's thread that would lead them out of the labyrinth of their childhood misunderstandings. N. Shelgunov. Parenting letters.
What kind of person is this Nevelskoy? - This is Zavoyka's Achilles' heel. Vasily Stepanovich considers himself the discoverer of the Amur, this is his weakness, and he cannot forgive Nevelsky for describing the river. N. Zadornov. Ocean war.
Vigilance is necessary, it is necessary to keep the gunpowder dry. A. Chakovsky. Blockade.
America's President, Theodore Roosevelt, began to probe the ground for mediation and peace between Japan and Russia. M. Sokolov. Sparks.
That - that, I look, the face is familiar, and most importantly: the voice is the trumpet of Jericho. No one else has met such a copper throat! A. Stepanov. The Zvonarev family.
Mikhail Illarionovich said in the circle of his family: I am a caliph for an hour. The Emperor does not love me. He is very vindictive and petty. L. Rakovsky. Kutuzov.
Russian symbolism ended a long time ago, but with the death of Bryusov, it finally sunk into oblivion. Yesenin. V.Ya. Bryusov.
Extreme opponents want to burn bridges and cut off all connection with the past. Goncharov. Memories.
This property consisted ... of meager movables, among which was the famous tarantass, which almost served as a bone of contention between mother and son. Saltykov - Shchedrin. Lord Golovlev.
The facts of reality rejected by him (idealism) do not prevent him from taking his houses of cards for real knightly castles. Belinsky. Derzhavin's writings.
"There, in this wonderful country (Siberia): potatoes - two kopecks, bread - a quarter, meat - three kopecks, wood - take it for nothing." In such an edible style, the people of the earth, cut off from it, draw for themselves a blue bird and the promised land. Prishvin. My country.
Do not boil, on, smoke ... - Do not be a muslin lady! E. Maltsev. Enter every house.
2.3 Scientific style of language
The dew point is the temperature at which water vapor, which previously did not saturate the air, becomes saturating.
Liquefaction of gases - their transformation into a liquid state.
Energy of a homogeneous electric field.
Ohm's law for a complete electrical circuit consisting of a current source with emf. and internal resistance.
The momentum is a function of the mechanical state of the material point.
Standing waves are a special case of wave interference.
Chemical equilibrium is a state of a system of reacting substances in which the rates of opposite reactions are equal.
The half-life is the time during which half of all the nuclei of the atoms of a radioactive substance decay.
Theory D.D. Ivanenko and E.N. Gapon subsequently received experimental confirmation.
The molecular orbital, the energy of which is greater than the energy of the atomic orbital, is called antibonding, and the electrons located on it are antibonding electrons.
All metals (except mercury) are characterized by a solid state of aggregation.
The oxidation state allows you to predict the oxidizing and reducing properties of a substance.
In irreversible reactions, the reverse process is expressed very slightly.
The rapid expansion of the production of these metals is caused by the needs of jet aircraft, rocket and nuclear technology.
Thus, redox reactions are a unity of two opposite processes.
The number indicating how many ligands the complexing agent holds is called the coordination number.
The mass of substances entering into a chemical reaction is equal to the mass of substances formed as a result of the reaction.
An oxidizing agent and a reducing agent always react with each other in ratios of their redox equivalents or multiples of them.
2.4 Formal business language
Self-employment is an integral part of the Russian economic system.
Marriage registration - is established both in the state and public interests, and in order to protect the personal and property rights and interests of spouses.
Social security - state, system of material support and service for citizens of Russia.
Legal representative - whose authority is established by law.
Limitation period is the period for the protection of the right by a court, arbitration or arbitration tribunal.
The housing stock is residential buildings, as well as residential premises in non-residential buildings, intended for permanent residence.
At the request of the landlord, the lease agreement may be terminated ahead of time by the court.
A power of attorney on behalf of a legal entity to receive or issue money must be signed by the chief accountant of this organization.
The bank that accepted the payer's payment order is obliged to transfer the corresponding amount of money to the recipient's bank.
Public organizations - are part of the political system of Russia.
Representation in court - conducting a civil case in court on behalf and in the interests of a party or a third party.
A materially responsible person is an employee who, according to labor legislation, bears full financial responsibility.
Holidays are statutory days dedicated to outstanding events or memorable dates.
An employment contract is an agreement between a worker and an enterprise.
Arbitration Court - a court elected by agreement between the parties concerned to resolve a particular dispute.
Administrative offense - encroaching on the state. or public order, private property.
Judiciary - this concept is associated with the specific activities of the court
2.5 Journalistic style of language
This belief is based, probably on the poetic definition of "oil is black gold."
The gas station business was criminalized back in Soviet times.
"Queens of gas stations" and their henchmen were regular customers of the OBKhSS.
Almost unchanged, this system came up to the time when the transition of the country to a market economy began.
It was on this wave that most of the current owners of gas station networks surfaced.
As law enforcement officials admit, today the gasoline market is under the control of shadow tycoons.
Where the petrol mafia has developed most widely is in the capital's airports.
Under the personal patronage of the general director and, according to rumors, his son, a lot of small service companies were created.
That's all the doubt-ridden TNT staff and the media had to content themselves with.
In the case of TNT, not only did the corporate image change, but the structure changed.
The continuation of this propaganda campaign was the film “The Future Has Come” received in the regions in mid-June.
The main problem of e-commerce today is the inability to make payments via the Internet.
Conclusion
Phraseologisms, although they have meaningful and formal features of level units (words and phrases), however, by themselves do not form a special language level. The fact is that phraseological units practically do not combine with each other in a sentence, and are also not divided into simpler level units and do not generate units of language more complex than themselves, - in other words, phraseological units are devoid of syntagmatic and hierarchical structural properties. Phraseological turnover is a rather complex and contradictory unity. Being a separate formation, it is endowed with a holistic meaning. Some properties bring together a phraseological unit with a phrase, others - with a word. On the basis of the discrepancy between the content and the way of expressing the phraseological turnover, many transitional, intermediate phenomena arise. Phraseologism is limited in the manifestation of its form of nominative and associative properties, which are regulated and constantly restrained by the internal form and the general (holistic) meaning of the phraseological phrase. Those or other modifications of phraseological units, as well as the expansion of contextual connections, must satisfy the requirements of the semantic and reverse unity of phraseological turnover. In the field of phraseology, various patterns and regular trends are manifested. It has been established, for example, that with an increase in the evaluative meaning, the verbal qualities of such phraseological units are correspondingly weakened and, first of all, their aspect-temporal activity decreases, and vice versa. It is also known that the measure of the idiomaticity of a phraseological unit depends on the nature and degree of deactualization of the components, the greater the discrepancy between the word of free use and the corresponding component, the more difficult it is to identify the proper meaning of the component, the higher the idiomaticity, the semantic indecomposability of the phraseological unit. The inverse relationship is also true. A fairly reliable way to determine the semantic integrity of a phraseological unit is the method of imposing a phraseological phrase on an equivalent phrase. When determining the morphological - syntactic properties and possibilities of a phraseological unit (for example, when correlating a phraseological unit with a certain part of speech), the method of detailed non-redundant interpretations is quite suitable. In a detailed interpretation, not only meaningful, but also formal elements of phraseological meaning can be reflected. But it is not always possible to reliably judge the semantic and grammatical properties of the interpreted phrase from the descriptive interpretation, since there cannot be complete equality between the interpreted phrase and its identifier. Observations on active processes in the development and change of Russian phraseology allow us to draw the following conclusions:
1. A large number of words and phraseological units that have ceased to be relevant have passed into the passive stock.
2. New words and phraseological units associated with the need to name new objects, concepts and phenomena have joined the vocabulary of the Russian language. The enrichment of the vocabulary is carried out by word formation according to the patterns that exist in the language, by borrowing foreign words.
3. The widespread use of scientific and technical terminology leads to a change in the scope of its use, causes the use of terms in a metaphorical and figurative sense; compare: high voltage, strength test, etc.
4. In connection with the interaction of styles, the stylistic coloring of words and phrases often changes (for example, time pressure, launch pad, help, give instructions, etc.).
The consequence of this process is the replenishment of neutral vocabulary. Stylistic shifts in individual words and phraseological units are often evaluated one-sidedly and cause heated discussions.
Bibliography
1. P.A. Lekant Modern Russian literary language. - Moscow., Higher School, 1982.
2. V.P. Zhukov Russian Phraseology. - Moscow., Higher School, 1986.
3. D.E. Rosenthal Modern Russian language part 1. - Moscow., Higher school, 1976.
4. N.A. Kondrashov Basic questions of the Russian language. - Moscow., Education, 1985.
5. A.V. Dudnikov Russian language. - Moscow., Enlightenment, 1983
6. V.M. Mokienko Riddles of Russian Phraseology. - Moscow., Higher School, 1990.
7. V.M. Mokienko Deep into the proverb. - Moscow., Education, 1975.
8. V.P. Zhukov School phraseological dictionary of the Russian language. - Moscow., Education, 1980.
9. B.M. Yavorsky Reference guide to physics. - Moscow., Nauka, 1984.
10. G.P. Khomchenko Inorganic Chemistry. - Moscow., Higher School, 1978.
11. E.A. Motina Legal guide for the population. - Moscow., Legal Literature, 1989.
12. Business weekly "Company". - Moscow., No. 24, 1999.
Hosted on Allbest.ru
Similar Documents
Two directions in views on the subject and essence of phraseology. The division of phraseological units into types according to the degree of semantic unity of their components. The problem of differentiation of variants and synonyms of phraseological units. Language game.
abstract, added 03.10.2006
Methods of lexico-semantic (component) analysis of phraseological units, typology of their components in the modern Russian language. Components-symbols in Russian phraseology. Types of formation of phraseological units of the modern Russian language.
abstract, added 08/20/2015
The concept and main stages in the development of phraseology. Psychological foundations for the formation of the lexical meaning of phraseological units. The problem of differentiation of variants and synonyms of phraseological units. Dialect phraseology in the works of V.M. Shukshin.
thesis, added 07/04/2010
The concept and definition of phraseological units, their classification according to the degree of semantic unity. Study of phraseological units of the modern Russian language: functional features, classification, distinctive features, semantic and stylistic relations.
term paper, added 11/15/2014
The concept of phraseology. Phraseology structure. Types of phraseological units. The functioning of phraseological units in speech. phraseological system. Stylistic stratification of English phraseology. The influence of phraseological units on the speech culture of society.
term paper, added 11/27/2002
Classification in terms of syntactic structure, semantic unity of components and style. The structure of Russian phraseological units with the component "tongue", "teeth", "throat". Morphological and syntactic properties of phraseological units.
term paper, added 08/25/2014
Basic concepts of phraseology of modern English. Semantic structure of the concept "time". Types of phraseological units in terms of the semantic stability of their components. Idioms used in modern English colloquial speech.
term paper, added 04/15/2009
The concept of phraseology, general characteristics of phraseological units, classification of phraseological units, sources of Russian phraseology. Stylistic errors in the use of phraseological units, stylistically unjustified change, distortion of figurative meaning.
term paper, added 04/15/2010
Phraseologism: essence and concept. Classification of phraseological units. Lexicographic development of Russian phraseology. Dictionaries of phraseological units of the Russian language. Ideographic dictionary. Dictionary of winged words. Russian lexicography.
abstract, added 05/31/2008
The subject and tasks of phraseology, the causes of formation, its semantics. The place of phraseology in the works of foreign scientists and in the Russian language. Relationship between culture and phraseology. Features of phraseological units of different countries. Comparison of Chinese and Russian phraseological units.
Phraseology as a science was studied by many Soviet and foreign linguists. Phraseology is the most vivid, lively and original part of the vocabulary of any language. Consider the basic concept of phraseology - phraseology. The Great Soviet Encyclopedia gives such a definition to the concept of phraseology.
Phraseologism is "a stable phrase, the meaning of which is not derivable from the meanings of its constituent components."
Academician VV Vinogradov for the first time was the synchronous classification of phraseological phrases of the Russian language in terms of their semantic unity.
As a reproducible linguistic unit, a phraseological phrase is always a single semantic whole, however, the ratio of the meaning of a phraseological unit as a whole and the meanings of its constituent components may be different. From this point of view, the phraseological turns of the Russian literary language can be divided into 4 groups:
- - Phraseological fusions,
- - Phraseological unity,
- - Phraseological combinations,
- - Phraseological expressions.
The first two groups constitute semantically indivisible phrases. They are equivalent in terms of their meaning to one word. The third and fourth groups are semantically segmented phrases. Their meaning is equivalent to the semantics of their constituent components. This classification belongs to V.V. Vinogradov.
Let's consider these groups in more detail.
Phraseological unions
Semantically indivisible phraseological turns, whose integral meaning is not relative to the individual meanings of their constituent words, are called phraseological fusions.
For example, the phraseological turnover "headlong" in the sense of swiftly, recklessly, headlong is the same unmotivated and conditional designation of objective reality, as a compound word like "recklessly" by education. (For example: And I, headlong, galloped thirty miles. Well, nothing, not the first time.”)
So, phraseological fusions are the equivalents of words, summed up certain grammatical categories as single, absolutely indecomposable units.
Phraseological combinations
In phraseological combinations there are words with both free and related use.
Consider the turnover "pea jester". The word "jester" has free use. It can be combined not only with the word "pea", but also with other words.
Or another turnover "bosom friend." The word "friend" is used loosely. As for the word "bosom", it is, as it were, attached to the word friend and can only be used with it.
Phraseological combinations have almost no homonymous free phrases. Their peculiarity is that the word included in their composition with phraseological related meanings can become synonymous (sudden death - sudden death). The wider the range of words with which a phraseological combination can be combined that has non-free use, the closer this combination is to the category of phraseological expressions .
It should be noted that Chekhov creatively selected the still unused words of the national Russian language, which could, on the basis of expanding semantic connections and relations, create new phraseological turns. Their expansion of semantic possibilities was a consequence of the fact that for the first time they became unusual connections with other words in a new context.
So, for example, a combination with the abstract word "attention": ... Please, gentlemen. Hang, so to speak, your ears on the nail of attention. Here, two words with free use form a new phraseological combination.
Phraseological expressions
Phraseological expressions do not differ from free phrases in terms of the nature of word connections and general meaning. They are only semantically distinct, but also consist entirely of words with free meanings. For example: "Serebryakov: Whoever remembers the old - that eye is out."
They differ from phraseological combinations in that they do not contain words with associated phraseological meanings. The words that make them up cannot have synonymous substitutions that are possible for words with a non-free meaning in a group of phraseological combinations (for example, open your mouth - open your mouth).
The main specific feature that limits phraseological expressions from free combinations of words is that in the process of communication they are not formed by the speaker, but are reproduced as ready-made units with a constant composition and meaning.
One of the features of A.P. Chekhov is the use of not the entire phraseological expression, but only part of it. For example: "... Predator dear, don't look at me like that, I'm an old sparrow ..." The combination "old sparrow" is used as a substantive phraseological expression, and therefore from the phraseological unit "you can't fool an old sparrow on chaff" other components turn out to be unnecessary and the author does not take them.
And such an expression as "Anything can be!" became a proverb. ("He's there ... sleeping with me. Maybe ... maybe ... Anything is possible!")
Phraseological units
Like phraseological fusions, they are semantically indivisible integral ones, however, integral semantics is motivated by the separate meanings of the words that make them up. For example: “Elena Andreevna: You buzz all day, everyone buzzes - how not to get bored! (With anguish). I'm dying of boredom, I don't know what to do." Phraseological unity "to die of boredom" in the sense of uncontrollable, to the point of exhaustion to experience boredom. The indecomposable meaning of phraseological units arises as a result of the merging of the meanings of their individual parts in a single generalized figurative semantics of the whole.
The semantic indivisibility of phraseological units brings them closer to phraseological references, and their semantic derivative, the conditionality of their meaning by the meaning of individual words, distinguishes them from phraseological references.
Chekhov in his play "Uncle Vanya" very actively uses the phraseological unity "to plunge headlong", "die of boredom", "stick a label", "open your eyes", "unsettle", "look into the grave", etc. etc., their meanings other than phraseological references are derivatives, follow from the semantics of the words that form them. In this regard, phraseological unity is similar to words with a derivative stem, i.e., a stem divided into morphological parts. However, it should be noted that this motivation is not direct, but indirect. All very numerous phraseological units in the Russian language are separate expressions, the constituent units of which the understanding is necessarily connected with the understanding of the inner figurative core on which they are built.
It is figurativeness that distinguishes phraseological units from homonymous free combinations of words. Such combinations of words as “shut up the fountain, God forbid memory, pour from empty to empty, not worth a penny, lay hands on yourself, there was no poppy dew in your mouth, you can’t afford it, drive it into your neck, are equally possible as phraseological units ( then these will be figurative expressions), and as ordinary free combinations of words (then these words will be used in their direct, nominal meanings).
Phraseological units do not represent a completely frozen mass: their constituent parts can be separated from each other by insertions of other words. For example: "To play such a fool: shoot twice and never hit!" This property of phraseological units sharply distinguishes them not only from phraseological fusions, but also from the vast majority of phraseological combinations and phraseological expressions.
Theoretical part.
Using the educational and scientific sources proposed in the list of references, and other sources, highlight the issue theoretically.
Option number 9 (question 9)
The concept of the phraseological system of the Russian language.
Functionally - stylistic role of phraseological units.
- The concept of the phraseological system of the Russian language
The basis of the language is phonetics, grammar (including syntax) and vocabulary - the so-called linguistic trinity, triad. But these sections of linguistics do not exhaust the transmission of human thought, because phraseology violates the harmony of this trinity. In real speech, the parts of the triad are closely intertwined and, together with phraseology, desperately resist violent separation.
The phraseology of the Russian language is a harmonious system. It has autonomy, since phraseological units are fundamentally different, on the one hand, from individual words, on the other hand, from free phrases, and at the same time it is part of a more complex system of the national language, being in certain relations with its different levels. For example, like words, phraseological units consist of phonemes that perform a meaningful function; this determines the systemic connections of phraseology with the phonemic level of the language. Phraseologisms correlate differently with different parts of speech, which characterizes their systemic connections at the morphological level. Performing certain syntactic functions in a sentence, phraseological units are in systemic relations with other linguistic units at the syntactic level.
The term phraseology means “the doctrine of turns of speech” (Greek phrasis “turnover, expression”; logos “concept, doctrine, science”) and the very set of such turns. After all, the phraseological material reflects the language in all its diversity. Phraseology helps to understand culture, mythology, modern life. Phraseology - language culture.
Each linguist understands phraseology in his own way.
V.V. Vinogradov defines phraseology with three different definitions
- as "a system of stable, reproducible, expressive phrases with a holistic meaning, which includes phraseological fusion and unity."
- “This is also the name of an independent linguistic discipline that studies the phraseological composition of a language as a system of all its multidimensionality.”
- as "a special department of lexicography, specializing in the compilation of phraseological dictionaries."
N.M. Shansky understands phraseology as:
- "a branch of the science of language that studies the phraseological system in its current state and historical development." Phraseological units are the object of study of phraseology.
M.I. Molotkov describes the phraseology as follows:
- "a scientific discipline that studies phraseological units, or phraseological units, of a language, and as the composition itself, or the totality, of such units in a language."
A common feature of all definitions is the understanding of phraseology as a linguistic discipline, the object of which is phraseological units. While N.M. Shansky emphasizes the point of view of time (the current state and historical development of phraseology), M.I. Molotkov and VV Vinogradov understand phraseology not only as a linguistic discipline, but also as a set (system) of phraseological units.
- History of Russian phraseology.
Phraseological units have attracted the attention of researchers for a long time. They were called by various names - sayings, winged words, aphorisms, proverbs, sayings, expressions, turns of speech, idioms, idioms, phrases - and already from the end of the 18th century. they were explained not only in special collections, but also in explanatory dictionaries.
The first to use the term "phraseology" in Russian linguistics was E. D. Polivanov in the 30s of the twentieth century. Polivanov believed that phraseology "will take a separate and stable position, like phonetics and morphology, in the linguistic literature of the future - when our science will be devoid of random gaps in the consistent formulation of various problems"
The emergence of phraseology as a linguistic discipline in Russian linguistics dates back to the 40s of the twentieth century and is associated with the name of Academician Viktor Vladimirovich Vinogradov. In a number of his works, he resolved some issues of a general nature and created a synchronous classification of phraseological units of the Russian language in terms of their semantic unity. Thanks to V.V. Vinogradov, phraseological units have become the subject of close attention and study of all those interested in the issues of vocabulary and style of artistic speech.
- The subject of phraseology.
The main task of phraseology is "knowledge of the phraseological system of the language in its present and history, in its connections and relationships with vocabulary, word formation and grammar."
The solution of the central theoretical issue of phraseology - the establishment of what constitutes a phraseological unit - is very important and necessary. This decision is important not only for constructing a phraseological theory of a given language and studying its phraseological system, but also in lexicographic and teaching work.
In some dictionaries, very often such examples were given that had nothing to do with phraseological units - for example. from fat (“from excess”), to death (“very much”). Some linguists considered these examples to be phraseological units, because they are written separately (graphically they act as prepositional-case forms of nouns). But these examples, except for separate spelling, do not differ in any way from ordinary words, that is, they are used in the form of an indecomposable semantic whole and have one main stress (with fat - immediately).
In modern linguistic literature, two main directions have been identified in solving this problem.
Representatives of one direction (B.A. Larin, S.I. Ozhegov, A.G. Rudnev and others) refer to phraseological units only such semantic units of a more complex order that are equivalent to a word, which are characterized by semantic renewal and metaphorization. Proverbs, sayings, many quotations and almost all complex terms are excluded from the field of phraseology, i.e. all those phrases that have not yet turned into lexically indivisible phrases, have not received a figuratively generalized meaning, have not become metaphorical combinations.
A different opinion is shared by such scientists as L.A. Bulakhovsky, A.A. Reformatsky, A.I. Efimov, E.M. Galkina-Fedoruk, N.M. Shansky, V.L. Arkhangelsky and others. Along with the actual phraseological turns in phraseology, they include proverbial expressions, quotations that have become popular expressions, complex terms. Such turns are called phraseological expressions (N.M. Shansky).
V.V. Vinogradov, in one of the first works on phraseology (“Basic Concepts of Russian Phraseology as a Linguistic Discipline”, 1946), considered proverbs and sayings as part of phraseological turns, referring them to the group of phraseological units. In subsequent works (“On the main types of phraseological units in the Russian language”, 1947; “Russian language: Grammatical doctrine of the word”, 1947), proverbs and sayings are no longer included in phraseology.
- Phraseological unit, or phraseological unit.
In every language there are phrases that arise when words are combined. Some of the phrases are free, others are not free. In free phrases, each word retains its own meaning and performs the syntactic function of a separate member of the sentence. In non-free phrases, which are called related, or phraseological, words are combined together, lose their individual lexical meaning and form a new semantic and syntactic whole, which in semantics is equated to a separate word
The definition of a phraseological unit is very important, but on the other hand, it is difficult. In the Russian linguistic tradition, there are several definitions of phraseological units:
Scientists Kokhtev N.N. and Rosenthal D.E. (1986, 4) define phraseological units as "lexically indivisible, integral in meaning, reproduced in the form of ready-made speech units of a phrase."
Shansky N.M. (1964, 171) describes phraseological units as "stable combinations, reproducible and ready-made units of the language, existing in the form of formations that are holistic in their meaning and stable in their composition and structure."
Mokienko V.M. (1980, 4) understands a phraseological unit as "a relatively stable, reproducible, expressive combination of words, which, as a rule, has a holistic meaning."
The term "phraseological unit" was introduced by V. V. Vinogradov. Some called phraseological units by the terms "stable phrase" or "phrase", which is very successfully combined with the terms "lexeme", "morpheme"
A phraseological unit, or phraseological unit, is a semantically non-free combination of words that is reproduced in speech as something unified in terms of semantic content and lexical and grammatical composition.
Today, to designate a phraseological unit as a linguistic unit, various terms are used - phraseological expression, phraseological unit, phraseological turn of speech, stable combination of words, stable phrase, idiomatic phrase, phraseological unit, idiom, idiomatism, phraseme, etc.
A phraseological unit occupies an intermediate (interlevel) position in the structure of the language between a word (a unit of the lexico-semantic tier) and a phrase (a unit of the syntactic tier).
Phraseologisms are a very important means of communication in each language, because they satisfy the needs of communication. Behind each phraseological unit is the history of the language, culture, literature, folklore. Pr. Kokhtev, Rosenthal (1986, 3) understand the phraseological unit as “national flavor of the language”, Pr. Mokienko, Stepanova (2008, 9) as “a kind of “black box” of historical, cultural and linguistic information”.
- Functional and stylistic role of phraseological units.
Phraseological units, generally gravitating towards the peripheral areas of the vocabulary of the Russian language, are naturally predisposed to stylistic marking, and most of them have it.
The functional and stylistic classification of phraseological units is of great importance, as it helps to outline the possible areas of their use. Understanding their expressive-stylistic meaning serves the same purpose.
The language is constantly replenished with a huge number of nominative-terminological units (compound terms and names), including set phrases. Some scientists include them in the system of phraseology (porcini mushroom, caesarean section, rest home), but only on the basis of their expressive-stylistic, and not semantic fusion (according to Shansky). Such units have lost their phraseology and, although they are genetically related to phraseology, they do not have the necessary set of differential features of phraseological units. Among the signs of phraseological units are figurativeness, emotional expressiveness, expressiveness and evaluative character. These features are often the most significant for phraseological units. If for significant parts of speech the categorical meanings of objectivity, action, state or attribute are important, which ensures their nominative function, then in the case of phraseological units, the weakening of this function occurs due to the strengthening of the emotional and figurative-expressive (“expression that conveys complex semantic overtones suppresses the meaning” ). Consequently, a phraseological unit is a special category of language units united by a common function and purpose - to evoke a figurative representation of an object and give it an emotionally expressive characteristic (Molotkov A.I.).
The functional role of phraseological units. From the point of view of their function in the language, phraseological units are divided into two groups:
1) nominative phraseological units that are the names of objects, phenomena, processes of the surrounding reality, for example: pansies - the name of a flower, white mushroom - the name of a mushroom, a question mark - the name of a scientific concept from the field of linguistics, an eyeball - the name of a scientific concept from the field of medicine;
Also, the appearance of phraseological units is determined by the ever-increasing pace of socio-economic life and scientific and technological progress, the need to designate new phenomena and concepts that arise in the process of socio-economic and cultural life of society. Eg. production reserves, seize the initiative.
For example: pansies - the name of a flower, porcini mushroom - the name of a mushroom, a question mark - the name of a scientific concept from the field of linguistics, an eyeball - the name of a scientific concept from the field of medicine;
2) figurative and expressive phraseological units, the characteristic features of which are artistic figurativeness, a high degree of generalization of meaning and emotionally expressive content. These phraseological units function in live colloquial speech, in artistic and journalistic texts with a special stylistic task. Consider the functions of these phraseological units in texts.
